Intel Core i7-4600M vs Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 Comparison

The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 and the Intel Core i7-4600M occupy very different corners of the hardware world—one is a server/workstation part, the other a mobile processor—yet both are Haswell-era, 22 nm designs from Intel. The benchmark data reveals a clear performance hierarchy, but the story is more nuanced than a simple win/loss tally. The Xeon dominates every shared test, but the i7-4600M counters with a lower power envelope, integrated graphics, and a higher boost clock. This analysis breaks down what those numbers mean for real-world workloads, where each chip excels, and who should consider which.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 wins all five shared Cinebench tests. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Xeon scores 225 versus the i7-4600M’s 161, a delta of 39.8%. That is a substantial single-threaded advantage, especially surprising given the Xeon’s lower 2.80 GHz base clock compared to the i7’s 2.90 GHz. The Xeon’s 4 physical cores and 10 MB of L3 cache clearly outweigh the i7’s turbo capability in this workload.

Multi-core results tell a similar story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon hits 382 while the i7-4600M manages 275, a 38.9% difference. The gap widens slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1595 vs 1147, +39.1%) and holds steady in Cinebench R23 multi-core (3798 vs 2732, +39%). This consistency across Cinebench versions suggests the Xeon’s advantage scales predictably with thread count and cache size, not just raw clock speed.

Single-core tests show the same pattern. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Xeon 536 points against the i7’s 385, a 39.2% lead. The Xeon’s 2.80 GHz base clock is actually lower than the i7’s 3.60 GHz boost, yet it still wins by nearly 40%. This implies the Xeon’s Haswell-EP architecture, with its larger 10 MB shared L3 cache, is far more efficient per clock than the mobile Haswell part. The i7-4600M’s only recorded win appears in Geekbench—1930 multi-core and 1018 single-core—but those tests were not run on the Xeon, so no direct comparison is possible.

The average benchmark scores reflect this dominance: the Xeon’s average is 1098, while the i7-4600M sits at 1093. That gap is tiny (0.5%), but it masks the fact that the Xeon’s percentile ranking (31st) is only one point higher than the i7’s (30th). In other words, these are closely matched overall performers, but the Xeon wins every head-to-head test by a wide margin.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-1603 v3 is the clear winner in any workload that benefits from more cores, more cache, or higher sustained memory bandwidth. Its 4 physical cores and 4 threads, combined with 10 MB of L3 cache and quad-channel DDR4 support (59.7 GB/s bandwidth), make it suited for multi-threaded rendering, compile jobs, or virtualization. The Cinebench multi-core scores—382, 1595, and 3798 across R15, R20, and R23—show it scales well with sustained load. Its 31st percentile ranking against all CPUs suggests it sits comfortably above the median, and its nearest rival (AMD PRO A10-8850B) matches its average score exactly at 1098, confirming it as a mid-pack workstation part.

The i7-4600M wins in the mobility arena, though no benchmark directly measures that. Its 37 W TDP is a fraction of the Xeon’s 140 W, and it includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. The i7’s 2.90 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost clock give it higher peak single-thread frequency, but that does not translate to Cinebench wins—the Xeon still beats it by ~39% in single-core tests. The i7’s dual-channel DDR3 (25.6 GB/s bandwidth) is half the Xeon’s memory throughput, and its 4 MB shared L3 cache is less than half. Where the i7 wins is efficiency and portability, not raw performance.

The i7-4600M’s Geekbench scores—1930 multi-core and 1018 single-core—are its only unique data points. Without a Xeon Geekbench result, we cannot compare directly, but the i7’s 30th percentile ranking and average score of 1093 put it in the same performance tier as the Xeon. Its nearest rivals (Intel Core i7-4610M, Intel Core i7-10510Y) are within 0.1-0.2% of its average score, indicating it is a typical mid-range mobile chip.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. Anyone prioritizing raw compute, especially multi-threaded workloads, should choose the Xeon. Its 39% lead across all Cinebench tests is consistent and decisive. The Xeon also offers ECC memory support, quad-channel DDR4, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes—features absent from the i7-4600M.

The i7-4600M is the pick only for scenarios where power consumption, size, or integrated graphics matter more than absolute speed. Its 37 W TDP makes it feasible in laptops or compact systems where the Xeon’s 140 W would be impractical. The included Intel HD 4600 graphics removes the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks, something the Xeon cannot offer. Its higher boost clock (3.60 GHz vs none) hints at better short-burst responsiveness, though the benchmark data does not confirm this.

Strictly from the data, the Xeon wins 5 out of 5 head-to-head tests. The i7-4600M has no recorded wins. If the choice is between these two for a fixed workload, the Xeon is the clear recommendation. For a mobile or low-power build, the i7 is the only viable option—but the performance trade-off is substantial.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1603 v3 scores 536, while the Intel Core i7-4600M scores 385, giving the Xeon a 39.2% lead.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Xeon averages 1098, and the i7-4600M averages 1093, a difference of 5 points (about 0.5%) in favor of the Xeon.

Q: Does the i7-4600M have any benchmark wins over the Xeon?

A: No. In the head-to-head tests, the Xeon wins all 5 Cinebench tests. The i7-4600M has only Geekbench scores (1930 multi-core, 1018 single-core), which were not run on the Xeon.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-4600M supports dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i7-4600M has integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600). The Xeon E5-1603 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Xeon E5-1603 v3 has a TDP of 140 W, while the i7-4600M has a TDP of 37 W.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on Intel’s 22 nm Haswell architecture, but they are distinct implementations. The Xeon E5-1603 v3 uses the Haswell-EP codename, designed for servers and workstations, while the i7-4600M uses the standard Haswell codename for mobile. The process node is identical (22 nm), but the transistor counts and die sizes differ dramatically: the Xeon packs 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die, while the i7-4600M has 960 million transistors on a 131 mm² die. This reflects the Xeon’s larger L3 cache (10 MB shared vs 4 MB shared) and additional memory channels.

Memory support diverges completely. The Xeon uses DDR4 with a quad-channel bus, while the i7-4600M uses DDR3 with a dual-channel bus. This yields a 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth for the Xeon versus 25.6 GB/s for the i7. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i7-4600M. PCIe lane counts differ as well: the Xeon provides 40 Gen 3 lanes, while the i7-4600M provides 16 Gen 3 lanes.

Integrated graphics is a major architectural split. The i7-4600M includes Intel HD 4600, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Xeon compensates with its workstation-oriented feature set, including a server-grade socket (Intel Socket 2011-3) versus the i7’s mobile socket (Intel Socket G3). Both chips are locked (multiplier unlocked: false) and are end-of-life products, with the Xeon releasing on 2014-09-07 and the i7 on 2013-08-31.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification. The Xeon has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-4600M has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are close—2.80 GHz for the Xeon and 2.90 GHz for the i7—but the i7 adds a 3.60 GHz boost clock, which the Xeon lacks entirely. TDP is starkly different: 140 W for the Xeon versus 37 W for the i7-4600M.

Cache configuration also diverges. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but L3 cache is 10 MB shared on the Xeon versus 4 MB shared on the i7. Memory support, bus width, and bandwidth all favor the Xeon, as detailed above. The Xeon supports ECC memory, while the i7 does not. PCIe lanes are 40 versus 16.

Socket types differ completely: Intel Socket 2011-3 for the Xeon and Intel Socket G3 for the i7-4600M. The i7 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600), while the Xeon has none. Market segments reflect this: the Xeon targets Server/Workstation, the i7 targets Mobile. The i7-4600M has a launch MSRP of $346, while the Xeon’s launch MSRP is not listed. Part numbers also differ (SR20K for the Xeon, SR1H7 for the i7).